KBUF
Posts: 459
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2005 1:12 pm

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 4:24 pm

FWIW, WN has cancelled Flight 1380 for today through Friday. Seems to be an indicator that they're going to retire the number and give the LGA-DAL-MSY-OAK-RNO-LAS-SFO flight a new one.
"Starting today, the Buffalo Sabres' reason for existence will be to win a Stanley Cup."-Terry Pegula, February 22, 2011
 
heyjoojoo
Posts: 76
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 8:28 pm

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 4:25 pm

PW100 wrote:
heyjoojoo wrote:
What are the odds of a piece of shrapnel being expelled in your direction into a small 10x14 opening?


Given that the window was not in line with the fan disk, I don't expect it was shrapnel. If it was, it certainly did not have any significant level of kinetic energy left (which basically is defining characteristic of shrapnel in this sense). High energy shrapnel would have hit the window in the fan plane. Not 7 - 8 windows further aft.


you don't think the window was impacted by a portion of the engine or its components?
 
dakota123
Posts: 233
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2006 11:03 pm

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 4:27 pm

PW100 wrote:
SEPilot wrote:
Uncontained failures are extremely rare, but they do happen. I have read that one passenger died, but it is not certain that it was the one sucked out the window. When you consider how many jet engines are flying and how much stress that they endure it is amazing that they are as reliable as they are.


As an turbine engine performance and maintenance engineer, this does not look like an uncontained failure. The fan case still looks intact, meaning that all high energy shrapnel was contained within the fain case.
Further, the failed window is NOT in line with the fan area.

It appears that the unbalance of the fan assembly caused inlet ducting and cowling to liberate. Which blew away and probably hit the window on its way back, causing the window to fail.
It is (theoretically) possible that fan blade debris hit the window. However since the window is not in the fan plane, there could not have been much rotational energy left in the blade when it left the fan case. In turbine engine world, that than no longer qualifies as "uncontained".

Mind you, this accident may very well change how the aerospace world, and turbine engineers and regulators in particular, consider and define contained/uncontained failures.
I would not be surprised if certification standard will be introduced taking structural integrity of inlet ducting and cowlings into consideration with respect to unbalance after blade failure (fan, compressor, turbine), which is not the case today.


Excellent post, agree with all your points.
“And If I claim to be a wise man, well surely it means that I don’t know”
 
electro3k
Posts: 11
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2014 8:31 pm

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 4:40 pm

ZaphodHarkonnen wrote:
So on a Discord server I'm on someone posted a pic of passengers with the masks on.
Well, I say on. More like leaned up against their mouth or being held there. Totally missing the fact it's supposed to go over your nose and there is an elastic band to keep it on. :/


I was on a southwest flight a few hours after this news and during safety demo, our flight attendant was already emphasizing... "put the mask over your mouth AND YOUR NOSE"
 
D L X
Posts: 12480
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 4:43 pm

spacecadet wrote:
D L X wrote:
So, it sounds like there may have been two distinct but related failures that explain the fact that the burst window is not in line with the engine cowling or fan blades.


The window is in line with where you might see shrapnel from an uncontained engine failure. Shrapnel will go in directions that aren't entirely predictable. In addition, you've got 300 knot airflow affecting that shrapnel - the shrapnel is slowing down at around 20 G's while the plane keeps going straight at 300 knots airspeed. People are acting like because the window was 10 or so feet past horizontal that that means there's something weird going on - there isn't. It's some sort of uncontained engine failure, which by definition means debris being flung around the engine, in unpredictable trajectories.


I'm not sure how that's any different from what I said.

spacecadet wrote:

What exactly caused the failure, and by extension what exactly broke the window, is anybody's guess at this point. But it's clearly an engine failure that resulted in shrapnel that struck the window. One failure, not two.


Clearly two failures.

1) Engine failure. (I do not use "uncontained" for the reasons stated in PW100's excellent post.)
2) Window blowing.

That they are related to the same event (as I noted) does not make them just one failure. Considering PW100's post that this does *not* appear to be an uncontained engine failure under the industry's definition, something new is going to have to happen. Was it expected that the fuselage could be damaged when an engine failure is "contained?" Is there something about the windows that needs to be addressed to prevent this in the future? Is there something about THESE windows that made this plane particularly susceptible to the window failure we saw? These are some of the questions that the investigation will have to address. Simply stopping at "uncontained engine failure" would leave the investigation incomplete.
 
D L X
Posts: 12480
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 4:44 pm

electro3k wrote:
ZaphodHarkonnen wrote:
So on a Discord server I'm on someone posted a pic of passengers with the masks on.
Well, I say on. More like leaned up against their mouth or being held there. Totally missing the fact it's supposed to go over your nose and there is an elastic band to keep it on. :/


I was on a southwest flight a few hours after this news and during safety demo, our flight attendant was already emphasizing... "put the mask over your mouth AND YOUR NOSE"


Make the mask not stink, and people will comply.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/trav ... on-planes/

Firstly, what you’re supplied isn’t exactly oxygen – nor is it not compressed air in the scuba diving sense. Oxygen tanks are heavy and bulky so aircraft use a more complicated system. The panel above each seat actually contains a cocktail of chemicals that, when burned, release oxygen. They might include barium peroxide, a fine white powder used in fireworks, sodium chlorate, more commonly used as a weedkiller, and potassium chlorate, a staple of school science lab experiments (it reacts violently with sugar).
Last edited by D L X on Wed Apr 18, 2018 4:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
smokeybandit
Posts: 1076
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 3:24 pm

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 4:49 pm

What sized hole in the window would cause enough pressure to pull a person through it? Is it possible the original hole was small but then the victim broke through the rest of it?
 
D L X
Posts: 12480
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL

Wed Apr 18, 2018 4:56 pm

MSPSXMFLIER wrote:
D L X wrote:
MSPSXMFLIER wrote:
Exaggerations like this from an overly emotional and hyper passenger do not help matters. Unless accurate information can be provided about an incident, stay off social media completely. I’ve seen this woman’s comment already picked up on a number of local news websites and rebroadcast as fact.

Never mind that it looks like her account is pretty god damn accurate so far.

Really? “I just saw a human being fly out of a plane 40,000 feet above”? Hardly accurate.

Multiple reports say that the deceased woman was sucked out the window to her waist. Are you really saying that saying she flew out the window is inaccurate?

Or, are you criticizing the 40,000 feet part? We all know the passengers are not altimeters, so what exact harm are you decrying?

Looks like this woman was bullied into taking down her post by hypercritical and emotional posters.
 
heyjoojoo
Posts: 76
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 8:28 pm

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL

Wed Apr 18, 2018 5:01 pm

D L X wrote:
MSPSXMFLIER wrote:
D L X wrote:
Never mind that it looks like her account is pretty god damn accurate so far.

Really? “I just saw a human being fly out of a plane 40,000 feet above”? Hardly accurate.

Multiple reports say that the deceased woman was sucked out the window to her waist. Are you really saying that saying she flew out the window is inaccurate?

Or, are you criticizing the 40,000 feet part? We all know the passengers are not altimeters, so what exact harm are you decrying?

Looks like this woman was bullied into taking down her post by hypercritical and emotional posters.


social media emotions generally offer nothing in a way of intellectual discourse.

Was the "missing fan blade" recovered?

And is this the actual window where the victim was seated? How in the world did they clean it up so well. No hint of any bio material or anything...

https://twitter.com/SweeneyABC/status/9 ... 3868005376
 
heyjoojoo
Posts: 76
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 8:28 pm

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 5:05 pm

What is the definition of 'uncontained engine failure'? Is there a 'contained engine failure'?
 
XT6Wagon
Posts: 2723
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:06 pm

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 5:18 pm

A contained failure would see parts leave the engine either forwards or backwards. Uncontained is spinny bits going out the side.
 
Jshank83
Posts: 2902
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2016 2:23 pm

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 5:28 pm

KBUF wrote:
FWIW, WN has cancelled Flight 1380 for today through Friday. Seems to be an indicator that they're going to retire the number and give the LGA-DAL-MSY-OAK-RNO-LAS-SFO flight a new one.


It seems to be flying today under flight 8881
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 7111
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 5:41 pm

heyjoojoo wrote:
What is the definition of 'uncontained engine failure'? Is there a 'contained engine failure'?


Looking at carefully placed statements on this thread, this one will be swept under the "contained" rug. Once it fits into contained definition whole lot of wiggle room for the airline with the investigation.

If someone MRO offers BOGO free engine overhaul deal with a 15-day turnaround, bean counters should just say no.
 
Audiodave1
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2004 12:02 am

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 5:41 pm

Local media/NTSB reporting some plane pieces were found north of Reading PA. No pix yet.
 
THS214
Posts: 231
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2017 4:01 pm

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 5:43 pm

PW100 wrote:
heyjoojoo wrote:
What are the odds of a piece of shrapnel being expelled in your direction into a small 10x14 opening?


Given that the window was not in line with the fan disk, I don't expect it was shrapnel. If it was, it certainly did not have any significant level of kinetic energy left (which basically is defining characteristic of shrapnel in this sense). High energy shrapnel would have hit the window in the fan plane. Not 7 - 8 windows further aft.


Hey,

I was thinking that the shrapnel first went outwards hit the wing that changed its trajectory. That would explain that there are no other visible damage on the fuselage (expect under the broken window).
 
User avatar
flybynight
Posts: 1490
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2003 1:58 pm

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 5:57 pm

THS214 wrote:
PW100 wrote:
heyjoojoo wrote:
What are the odds of a piece of shrapnel being expelled in your direction into a small 10x14 opening?


Given that the window was not in line with the fan disk, I don't expect it was shrapnel. If it was, it certainly did not have any significant level of kinetic energy left (which basically is defining characteristic of shrapnel in this sense). High energy shrapnel would have hit the window in the fan plane. Not 7 - 8 windows further aft.


Hey,

I was thinking that the shrapnel first went outwards hit the wing that changed its trajectory. That would explain that there are no other visible damage on the fuselage (expect under the broken window).


There are pictures showing damage to the wing itself.
Heia Norge!
 
THS214
Posts: 231
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2017 4:01 pm

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 6:04 pm

flybynight wrote:
THS214 wrote:
PW100 wrote:

Given that the window was not in line with the fan disk, I don't expect it was shrapnel. If it was, it certainly did not have any significant level of kinetic energy left (which basically is defining characteristic of shrapnel in this sense). High energy shrapnel would have hit the window in the fan plane. Not 7 - 8 windows further aft.


Hey,

I was thinking that the shrapnel first went outwards hit the wing that changed its trajectory. That would explain that there are no other visible damage on the fuselage (expect under the broken window).


There are pictures showing damage to the wing itself.


Wing yes, but I cant see damage on the fuselage other than the window.
 
User avatar
flyingclrs727
Posts: 2421
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:44 am

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 6:06 pm

Does anybody know whether Southwest would fix this aircraft at PHL, or would they do just enough repairs to allow it to be ferried unpressurized somewhere else?
 
mcdu
Posts: 1531
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 5:23 am

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 6:08 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:
heyjoojoo wrote:
What is the definition of 'uncontained engine failure'? Is there a 'contained engine failure'?


Looking at carefully placed statements on this thread, this one will be swept under the "contained" rug. Once it fits into contained definition whole lot of wiggle room for the airline with the investigation.

If someone MRO offers BOGO free engine overhaul deal with a 15-day turnaround, bean counters should just say no.


Southwest ran afoul of the FAA a few years ago for not complying with proper repairs on the skin lap joints of the classics. They were hit with a hefty 12 million dollar fine back then. If this goes down the same path in the investigation Southwest will have a lot of explaining to do about their maintenance. Two events for them in close proximity is a trend.
 
heyjoojoo
Posts: 76
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 8:28 pm

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 6:16 pm

XT6Wagon wrote:
A contained failure would see parts leave the engine either forwards or backwards. Uncontained is spinny bits going out the side.


So PW100 thinks something went out the back or front of the engine?

This photo does show awfully a lot of damage even to the wing.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DbBrG9_XUAYBEOh.jpg
 
User avatar
atcsundevil
Moderator
Posts: 3586
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:22 pm

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 6:23 pm

heyjoojoo wrote:
What is the definition of 'uncontained engine failure'? Is there a 'contained engine failure'?

Yes, Wikipedia, I know.. In this case, it gives a pretty clear definition.

A contained engine failure is one in which components might separate inside the engine but either remain within the engine's cases or exit the engine through the tail pipe.
An uncontained engine failure is more serious because pieces often exit the sides of the engine, posing potential danger to the aircraft structure and those within the plane.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbine_engine_failure
 
User avatar
flyingclrs727
Posts: 2421
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:44 am

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 6:26 pm

SumChristianus wrote:
So was depressurization the cause of death, or was it cuts from the window, or the impact of the object which broke through the window, or a combination of the three? A lot happened....
Awful...
Will this elicit a look at seat-belt design?
Perhaps open-rotors will get a setback as well, given the greater danger they pose in a blade failure (no casing to control a failure)?


That information will be in the coroner's report. Anything said before it is released is just speculation.
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 13996
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 6:27 pm

mcdu wrote:
dtw2hyd wrote:
heyjoojoo wrote:
What is the definition of 'uncontained engine failure'? Is there a 'contained engine failure'?


Looking at carefully placed statements on this thread, this one will be swept under the "contained" rug. Once it fits into contained definition whole lot of wiggle room for the airline with the investigation.

If someone MRO offers BOGO free engine overhaul deal with a 15-day turnaround, bean counters should just say no.


Southwest ran afoul of the FAA a few years ago for not complying with proper repairs on the skin lap joints of the classics. They were hit with a hefty 12 million dollar fine back then. If this goes down the same path in the investigation Southwest will have a lot of explaining to do about their maintenance. Two events for them in close proximity is a trend.


Is there any 121 carrier who has not been fined by FAA for a maintenance issue at some point? Perhaps the investigation will point to WN maintenance practices and perhaps it will not, but this post seemingly jumps the gun a bit (not that that is a big surprise given your irrational disdain for all things non-UA).
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
User avatar
Jouhou
Posts: 1969
Joined: Tue May 24, 2016 4:16 am

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 6:33 pm

bob75013 wrote:
Early accident statements said that the deceased passenger was removed from the plane via the window. Later reports said that an RN performed CPR on her, which would indicate that at least at that point the woman was completely inside the plane. Have we now discredited the original report? It would make no sense to put her back in the window if she had already been removed from it

Edit add: I just heard an ABC News report that said that the woman was sucked thru the window to her waist, and likely died instantly from the initial impact.


If it wasn't instant I'd guess heart failure resulting from hypovolemic shock, considering what the side of the fuselage looks like :(
 
flybucky
Posts: 175
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2018 7:44 pm

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 6:33 pm

ZaphodHarkonnen wrote:
So on a Discord server I'm on someone posted a pic of passengers with the masks on.
Well, I say on. More like leaned up against their mouth or being held there. Totally missing the fact it's supposed to go over your nose and there is an elastic band to keep it on. :/


Yeah, the internet was quick to jump on the guy for not putting his mask over his nose. Well, if you looked at the photo carefully, you will see that everyone had the mask off their noses. Perhaps there was a reason why everyone had their masks off their noses?

The guy who posted the video told reporters, "it was difficult to breathe through the oxygen mask." It's possible that the passengers did have it over their nose and mouth initially. And then when the plane descended to lower altitudes, they took it off their nose due to the smell from the chemically generated oxygen, or that it was uncomfortable to breathe with it on.
 
phljjs
Posts: 328
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2005 7:26 am

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 6:35 pm

flyingclrs727 wrote:
Does anybody know whether Southwest would fix this aircraft at PHL, or would they do just enough repairs to allow it to be ferried unpressurized somewhere else?


In the past, WN has repaired aircraft that suffered significant damage at PHL. They erected a temporary "hangar" on the ramp near Atlantic Aviation when the underside of a plane was pierced by a tow bar that broke during a pushback. DL has also done the same on occasion. The same will probably be done with the plane involved in yesterday's accident.
 
User avatar
smithbs
Posts: 316
Joined: Wed May 17, 2017 6:09 pm

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 6:35 pm

heyjoojoo wrote:
So PW100 thinks something went out the back or front of the engine?

This photo does show awfully a lot of damage even to the wing.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DbBrG9_XUAYBEOh.jpg


I read PW100's post as to mean that (insert standard disclaimer for speculative comments based on highly incomplete information here) that the engine failed in a contained manner, but was shocked so badly that the cowling shattered. In other words, the energy was transferred through the fan case and into the structure beyond, which blew away. My hypothesis is that a larger piece of cowling flew back and scored the window enough for it to give way.

You need pretty good energy to damage a window. You will get that energy either through relative velocity or mass. I'm guessing it wasn't a high velocity shrapnel that did it, but a large piece with a good amount of mass. The picture in heyjoojoo's post (thanks for posting!) shows a scrape under the incident window, which I post as evidence that it was large. I'd be curious if the aft stabilizer shows any damage as well.

Or, maybe the scrape on the metal under the incident window was enough to un-seat the window.

If either of my theories are correct, then it may have just been very bad luck that the piece impacted at just the right point to cause the fatality. :(
 
User avatar
glideslope
Posts: 1553
Joined: Sun May 30, 2004 8:06 pm

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 6:38 pm

PW100 wrote:
SEPilot wrote:
Uncontained failures are extremely rare, but they do happen. I have read that one passenger died, but it is not certain that it was the one sucked out the window. When you consider how many jet engines are flying and how much stress that they endure it is amazing that they are as reliable as they are.


As an turbine engine performance and maintenance engineer, this does not look like an uncontained failure. The fan case still looks intact, meaning that all high energy shrapnel was contained within the fain case.
Further, the failed window is NOT in line with the fan area.

It appears that the unbalance of the fan assembly caused inlet ducting and cowling to liberate. Which blew away and probably hit the window on its way back, causing the window to fail.
It is (theoretically) possible that fan blade debris hit the window. However since the window is not in the fan plane, there could not have been much rotational energy left in the blade when it left the fan case. In turbine engine world, that than no longer qualifies as "uncontained".

Mind you, this accident may very well change how the aerospace world, and turbine engineers and regulators in particular, consider and define contained/uncontained failures.
I would not be surprised if certification standard will be introduced taking structural integrity of inlet ducting and cowlings into consideration with respect to unbalance after blade failure (fan, compressor, turbine), which is not the case today.


Extremely well thought out. Thank you for the post. Very informative.
To know your Enemy, you must become your Enemy.” Sun Tzu
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 7111
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 6:42 pm

smithbs wrote:
...
You need pretty good energy to damage a window. ..:(


Is it possible shrapnel never hit the window, but punctured the fuselage next to the window and explosive decompression ripped the window out?
 
Okie
Posts: 4025
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2003 11:30 am

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 6:46 pm

smithbs wrote:
I read PW100's post as to mean that (insert standard disclaimer for speculative comments based on highly incomplete information here) that the engine failed in a contained manner, but was shocked so badly that the cowling shattered. In other words, the energy was transferred through the fan case and into the structure beyond, which blew away. My hypothesis is that a larger piece of cowling flew back and scored the window enough for it to give way.


Exactly

********

Here is the issue. The test requires that a single blade failure be contained while on a "Test Stand"
That does not emulate the effects of the inlet/containment being exposed to the loads of the wind stream of 250kts plus after or during the test.
That is how Okie sees the situation.

Okie
 
THS214
Posts: 231
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2017 4:01 pm

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 6:50 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:
smithbs wrote:
...
You need pretty good energy to damage a window. ..:(


Is it possible shrapnel never hit the window, but punctured the fuselage next to the window and explosive decompression ripped the window out?


Most likely not. Theres no visible puncture on the the fuselage and it needs a severe puncture next to the window to continue and brake the window.
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 9298
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 6:53 pm

Okie wrote:
smithbs wrote:
I read PW100's post as to mean that (insert standard disclaimer for speculative comments based on highly incomplete information here) that the engine failed in a contained manner, but was shocked so badly that the cowling shattered. In other words, the energy was transferred through the fan case and into the structure beyond, which blew away. My hypothesis is that a larger piece of cowling flew back and scored the window enough for it to give way.


Exactly

********

Here is the issue. The test requires that a single blade failure be contained while on a "Test Stand"
That does not emulate the effects of the inlet/containment being exposed to the loads of the wind stream of 250kts plus after or during the test.
That is how Okie sees the situation.

Okie


I agree with Okie on this. Tests are best efforts at real world. Real world incidents don't fail in the same place, and they don't manifest the same way under the same conditions.
Where ever you go, there you are.
 
flybucky
Posts: 175
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2018 7:44 pm

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 7:04 pm

PW100 wrote:
Given that the window was not in line with the fan disk, I don't expect it was shrapnel. If it was, it certainly did not have any significant level of kinetic energy left (which basically is defining characteristic of shrapnel in this sense). High energy shrapnel would have hit the window in the fan plane. Not 7 - 8 windows further aft.


I think the shrapnel could be directly shot out in line with the fan disk, and still hit 10 windows aft with high kinetic energy.

First, the shrapnel would still retain most of the port/starboard direction kinetic energy.

The reason that the shrapnel would hit 10 windows aft is because the air resistance is slowing it down in the fore/aft direction relative to the plane. But actually, that increases the KE relative to the plane. Without air resistance, the KE in the fore/aft direction is 0 relative to the airplane. With air resistance decelerating the shrapnel in the fore/aft direction, it's increasing the velocity relative to the airplane, therefore increasing the KE in the fore/aft direction.

I think it's entirely possible for shrapnel to have hit the window at over 100 mph in the port/starboard direction.
 
fly4ever78
Posts: 65
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2017 10:17 pm

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 7:12 pm

flybucky wrote:
ZaphodHarkonnen wrote:
So on a Discord server I'm on someone posted a pic of passengers with the masks on.
Well, I say on. More like leaned up against their mouth or being held there. Totally missing the fact it's supposed to go over your nose and there is an elastic band to keep it on. :/


Yeah, the internet was quick to jump on the guy for not putting his mask over his nose. Well, if you looked at the photo carefully, you will see that everyone had the mask off their noses. Perhaps there was a reason why everyone had their masks off their noses?

The guy who posted the video told reporters, "it was difficult to breathe through the oxygen mask." It's possible that the passengers did have it over their nose and mouth initially. And then when the plane descended to lower altitudes, they took it off their nose due to the smell from the chemically generated oxygen, or that it was uncomfortable to breathe with it on.


He also stated several times that instead of putting the mask on he pulled out his laptop in an effort to purchase inflight internet "as the plane was going down". I guess I just can't relate to that mind set in general.
 
rj777
Posts: 1798
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2000 1:47 am

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 7:17 pm

Why do some people call this incident a "crash"......... it was an in-flight emergency situation........ the plane landed safely!
 
User avatar
atcsundevil
Moderator
Posts: 3586
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:22 pm

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 7:17 pm

rj777 wrote:
Why do some people call this incident a "crash"......... it was an in-flight emergency situation........ the plane landed safely!

I believe it should technically be referred to as an "accident" (as opposed to "incident") since there was a fatality involved. Situations are generally deemed accidents when there is a fatality and/or major structural damage to the aircraft. "Crash" wouldn't be used as a technical term in any case.
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 1481
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 7:19 pm

Just looked up Everest climbers, they start to use oyxgen at 7,000 meters (23,000 Feet), but they are in excellent health and have conditioned for it. At the same time my grandmother was not allowed to go above 8,000 feet in Colorado, she lived in Denver at 5,280 feet because of the thin air.

So getting down to FL10 is recommended, being a few thousand above this does not cause issues.
 
pugman211
Posts: 474
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2012 1:55 pm

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 7:26 pm

heyjoojoo wrote:
This photo does show awfully a lot of damage even to the wing.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DbBrG9_XUAYBEOh.jpg


That window frame is definitely distorted on the lower aft edge on the silver frame. But it also looks like it is forced outwards, possibly from the body of the deceased.

Could the glass have been stuck by a mass and a shockwaves caused the glass to shatter? Would the cabin pressure cause the glass to break? Thoughts on that scenario.
 
User avatar
ojjunior
Posts: 826
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2006 12:31 am

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL

Wed Apr 18, 2018 7:32 pm

ikolkyo wrote:


Not even a single drop of blood for my eyes...
Sorry apocalypse announcers, try again later...
 
indcwby
Posts: 318
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2010 7:32 pm

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 7:33 pm

Am I wrong for not liking the reports in the media/social media that 'a pilot' helped saved the lives of flight WN 1380. That pilot. the Captain was former NAVY pilot and is a woman. But no mention of the FO and the Cabin Crew? Maybe I'm just being crabby.

https://twitter.com/juliettekayyem/stat ... 6139449344
https://twitter.com/tomwcleary/status/9 ... 9979474944
https://twitter.com/dabeard/status/986427804567863298
https://twitter.com/ABC/status/986679641841786880
A319, A320, A330, A340, B717, B727, B737, B747, B757, B767, B777, CRJ7, DC10, MD88, MD11, E145, E175
"Always remember that you fly an airplane with your head, not your hands."
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9526
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 7:34 pm

mcdu wrote:
Southwest ran afoul of the FAA a few years ago for not complying with proper repairs on the skin lap joints of the classics. They were hit with a hefty 12 million dollar fine back then. If this goes down the same path in the investigation Southwest will have a lot of explaining to do about their maintenance. Two events for them in close proximity is a trend.


IF is a big word, though. Not as big as DAO, but still big. I guess we’ll know when the true investigation is complete.
-Dave


MAX’d out on MAX threads. If you are starting a thread, and it’s about the MAX - stop. There’s already a thread that covers it.
 
XT6Wagon
Posts: 2723
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:06 pm

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 7:39 pm

mcdu wrote:
dtw2hyd wrote:
heyjoojoo wrote:
What is the definition of 'uncontained engine failure'? Is there a 'contained engine failure'?


Looking at carefully placed statements on this thread, this one will be swept under the "contained" rug. Once it fits into contained definition whole lot of wiggle room for the airline with the investigation.

If someone MRO offers BOGO free engine overhaul deal with a 15-day turnaround, bean counters should just say no.


Southwest ran afoul of the FAA a few years ago for not complying with proper repairs on the skin lap joints of the classics. They were hit with a hefty 12 million dollar fine back then. If this goes down the same path in the investigation Southwest will have a lot of explaining to do about their maintenance. Two events for them in close proximity is a trend.


you mean the one where the FAA decided that obeying the FAA's written word was a huge safety issue? Given the number of 737s WN operates 4+ segments a day, The number of flights between the two events is massive. God help any other industry that having two failures out of millions of uses is a huge issue.

As far as contained/uncontained, I'm not sure if this is a gray area where its technically contained or straight up uncontained. Regardless, I think research into improved nacelle design is needed as its clear it comes apart in a way that's damaging to the airframe.
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 1481
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 7:44 pm

smithbs wrote:
You need pretty good energy to damage a window. You will get that energy either through relative velocity or mass. I'm guessing it wasn't a high velocity shrapnel that did it, but a large piece with a good amount of mass. The picture in heyjoojoo's post (thanks for posting!) shows a scrape under the incident window, which I post as evidence that it was large. I'd be curious if the aft stabilizer shows any damage as well.

Or, maybe the scrape on the metal under the incident window was enough to un-seat the window.

If either of my theories are correct, then it may have just been very bad luck that the piece impacted at just the right point to cause the fatality. :(


It looks like the distance from the cowling to the window is about 20 feet back and around 10 feet from the fuse. A piece with some area (part of the cowling) would leave the engine with mostly a sideways velocity, but would quickly slow in the forward direction from cruise speed down. This debris could have been moving at 60 MPH or more sideways when it hit.

I've seen the damage a 3/4" nut falling from 40 floors above does. It blasted thru 2 2x10 planks of the cover, then embedded half way into the asphalt alley below.
 
AvroLanc
Posts: 58
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2016 12:40 pm

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 8:09 pm

JayinKitsap wrote:
smithbs wrote:
You need pretty good energy to damage a window. You will get that energy either through relative velocity or mass. I'm guessing it wasn't a high velocity shrapnel that did it, but a large piece with a good amount of mass. The picture in heyjoojoo's post (thanks for posting!) shows a scrape under the incident window, which I post as evidence that it was large. I'd be curious if the aft stabilizer shows any damage as well.

Or, maybe the scrape on the metal under the incident window was enough to un-seat the window.

If either of my theories are correct, then it may have just been very bad luck that the piece impacted at just the right point to cause the fatality. :(


It looks like the distance from the cowling to the window is about 20 feet back and around 10 feet from the fuse. A piece with some area (part of the cowling) would leave the engine with mostly a sideways velocity, but would quickly slow in the forward direction from cruise speed down. This debris could have been moving at 60 MPH or more sideways when it hit.

I've seen the damage a 3/4" nut falling from 40 floors above does. It blasted thru 2 2x10 planks of the cover, then embedded half way into the asphalt alley below.


I would tend to agree with the above. A large piece of debris I.e. cowling could easily be thrown against the fuselage, sure there would be some turbulent zones in this area. I wonder if the outer windows are designed for this type of impact. A large piece of cowling would not fly cleaning in this environment.
707, 717, 727, 732, 734, 737 ,738, 7M8, 742, 744, 767, 773, 789.
DC8, 9,10, MD80 ,L1011 ,HSTrident, BAC111, DHComet.
DH8-100, 400, CRJ100,200,700, EM75,90, A310,319,320,321,333
 
arffguy
Posts: 110
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2005 2:20 pm

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 8:13 pm

smithbs wrote:
My hypothesis is that a larger piece of cowling flew back and scored the window enough for it to give way.



I agree. Lots of people are focused on the fan blades. I think the fan cowling failure is what may have taken out the window. That's a large piece of equipment coming off in a violent and uncontrolled manner.

Where is one of those YouTube guys that has a GoPro stuck to the window when you need him? No one would be complaining about a "boring video just looking at a wing."
Time to spare, go by air.
 
D L X
Posts: 12480
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 8:19 pm

pugman211 wrote:
heyjoojoo wrote:
This photo does show awfully a lot of damage even to the wing.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DbBrG9_XUAYBEOh.jpg


That window frame is definitely distorted on the lower aft edge on the silver frame. But it also looks like it is forced outwards, possibly from the body of the deceased.

Could the glass have been stuck by a mass and a shockwaves caused the glass to shatter? Would the cabin pressure cause the glass to break? Thoughts on that scenario.

Being forced outwards is what one should expect from an explosive decompression. This evidence supports my theory that shrapnel hit the fuselage, which was weakened and subsequently failed, near the window (already the weakest points).

Cabin pressure would not cause undamaged glass to break, but it could certainly cause damaged glass to give way.
 
BAINY3
Posts: 184
Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2017 4:42 pm

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 8:20 pm

On the last page there was some discussion about this being the first U.S. fatal accident of such-and-such nature since 1996 or 2009 or whatever. I went back and looked at the list and here is where this accident fits. All of this is just for U.S.-based scheduled airlines, excluding air taxi/135, etc.

- First passenger fatality accident since Colgan Air (Continental Connection), Feb 2009 (the Buffalo stall)
- First passenger fatality flight with an origin or destination in the NYC area since Feb 2009 (same as above)
- First Southwest fatality accident, including ground fatalities, since Dec 2005 (the Midway snowstorm overrun)
- First fatality accident caused by any mechanical issue, not pilot error, since Air Midwest (US Airways Express), Jan 2003 (Charlotte crash caused primarily by maintenance error regarding elevator cables)
- First mainline passenger fatality accident since American, Nov 2001 (Flight 587, Queens NYC)
- First fatal accident with an origin or destination in the Dallas/Fort Worth area since American, June 1999 (Little Rock overrun)
- First accident with exactly one passenger fatality since United, Dec 1997 (turbulence over Pacific killed one)
- First fatal accident caused by single engine failure since Delta, July 1996 (Pensacola incident)
- First passenger fatalities on any type of 737 since USAir, Sept 1994 (Pittsburgh rudder malfunction)
- First ever Southwest passenger fatality (excluding that one guy that went crazy and brought it upon himself)
- First ever passenger fatality on any 737NG variant.
- Not sure when the last time a passenger died due to being sucked out of a window in the U.S. because I didn't want to comb that far back in the records, but people keep mentioning National Flight 27 in Nov 1973 so I assume that's the answer.

Again, this is just among U.S. airlines. Hopefully I haven't made any mistakes.
 
D L X
Posts: 12480
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL

Wed Apr 18, 2018 8:21 pm

ojjunior wrote:

Not even a single drop of blood for my eyes...
Sorry apocalypse announcers, try again later...

It's possible you are not looking at the right part of the plane. Where should you expect to see blood when someone is partially ejected from the plane?
 
LTC8K6
Posts: 1534
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 8:36 pm

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 8:25 pm

D L X wrote:
HeyHey wrote:
heyjoojoo wrote:
What are the odds of a piece of shrapnel being expelled in your direction into a small 10x14 opening?


Someone may have asked this before....if so I apologize.

Could a fix for this be that heavy duty ballistic glass be used on the closest 3-4 windows to the engines? Glass can be engineered to withstand almost anything, but I’m sure there are practical thickness and weight considerations to be had.

Sounds like cockpit glass.

But I'd reiterate, to me, it doesn't sound like shrapnel piercing the glass was the main problem as opposed to ancillary damage to the window (which includes the aluminum frame) caused the air INSIDE the cabin to pop it out.


In the pics from inside the plane, the material visible in the window frame appears to have shattered, not popped out?

It's difficult to tell, though. It could be the inside layer I'm seeing, and not the actual window.

A few scenarios are possible.

Shrapnel could have come through the window, and struck the victim in the head, gravely injuring her, and the subsequent depressurization then pulled her unconscious body into the window frame area, and passengers then pulled her back.

Shrapnel could have damaged the window, which then failed, and pulled the victim partially ouf of the window. Debris then strikes her before the passengers can pull her back in.

One thing we can see is that there is a lot of what appears to be blood trailing back from the window.
 
phljjs
Posts: 328
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2005 7:26 am

Re: WN 1380 LGA-DAL emergency landing at PHL, 1 fatality

Wed Apr 18, 2018 8:28 pm

The plane has been moved into the AA hangar past Terminal A, near Cargo City.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos